#Its filled with people who debate how I generally live and think my life isn't hard enough and so I deserve more suffering half the time

[foxgirlmoth]

You ever just get hit hard as hell that you've felt trapped in your place of residence for years and years and you're just so tired from working the most shit jobs for a decade you just wanna scream.

[novelistash]

Wattpad & Twitch?

I saw the term Writeblr. Am I a Writeblr? Is Writeblr a page or a person? Well, this Jon Snow has been dipping their toe into the wide world of Wattpad. Any other writers on there? Drop your links! I've been reading stories live on Twitch, and it's been a lot of fun! There's a lot of lost talent there, as with all writing spaces, but it definitely needs some help finding air to breathe.

Why did I decide to read Wattpad stories live on Twitch? Read more. (I hope I'm using this feature right.)

About two and a half years back, I decided that it was time to stop dragging my feet and get traditionally published. (Well I try to get trad pubbed.) I knew that Twitter would be the place to promote and Wattpad would generally be the place to share, but I also knew those places would be full of competition. November was coming up so I thought, "why don't I live stream Nano? That'll be fun." It wasn't.

As much as people don't want to read, they definitely don't want to read while an author is writing. Twitter had a very small writing community then and I haven't seen it get any more popular. Which isn't to say it couldn't get popular, but I don't think it works as a way to GET an audience. I could talk about those who've found moderate success, but if I'm going to do that I'd like to talk to them and maybe interview them. Something I've considered putting on my ghost town of a YT channel.

Regardless, I was on Twitch for about a month. I never gained any kind of following and every viewer I saw on those channels were people like me, those who were trying to promote their own writing. So, yes, I could gain followers of other writers, but I couldn't build a brand that way. I had too much experience with similar platforms to think otherwise. If I wanted to get readers, I needed to be on the platform that readers were using.

That lead me to more or less wasting two years on Twitter. I mean, I met some cool people while on there and had good interactions. But was it good for my brand? Did it help me find readers? I'd say a resounding "no" on both parts. The funny thing about Twitter is that it's great at making you think that people care about you. Shit post about a bad day? Hundreds of replies. Link to a blog going into detail about that bad day? Now you're starting to see how little people actually care. At some point I can go into the nuances of my time in the trenches of Twitter, but the point is that it didn't help my writing career.

For me, the biggest problem with Twitter was the same problem with all writer-centric spaces: we are sellers without customers. I like to describe these spaces as towns of vendors. We each have our vendor stall set up, and see lots of people walking. This is great! That means there are customers! Except all of those people walking on the street are also vendors. They're only there to sell their own wares. Yes, there's mutual inflation and reciprocal commerce, but writers make a poor basis for a readership. If someone is selling eggs, they want to sell to bakers, cooks, and the common man, not their fellow ranchers.

Regardless of fame and fortune, I want a readership. I write for myself, yes, but once those words are on the page, I want someone to read those words. I've been writing for over twenty years by this point and during that time my perspective has almost always been, how do I get readers? It's a natural question to ask, but it's driven by selfish desires at its core. I think for the writers of today, the bigger question might need to be, "how do I get people to read?"

The larger problem with readers, is that there aren't that many of them. If there are ten billion eggs in a town of a hundred, most of those eggs are going to rot. And even though most everyone knows that the general public doesn't habitually read, there seems to be this stigma against talking about it. Ever since I started writing, the talking point has always been "people thought comics would destroy the novel, but it didn't."

Okay, so, there are still readers, but could you say that a majority of the people read? Comic books, television, movies, and video games all offer more senses than the written word. They offer experiences that books never can, so why would anyone choose to read a book when they could instead watch that same story play out on screen?

Well, the written word can actually offer things that other media can't. In general, novels are closer to the emotional landscape of the story. Books invite the reader to be a part of the creation process, rather than a passive observer. The lack of a spoken word or portrait lets the reader construct whatever voice or face they desire. Beyond all of that, readers tend to spend more time with a book than any other media. (I'll hold off on a thorough debate of the narrative quality of iterative gameplay loops in video games for the time being, but I'd be hard pressed to find someone who enjoyed Preston Garvey's procedurally generated missions more than any of the designed quests in Fallout 4.) The point is that the written word is not without value, simply that its qualities are losing appreciation.

That's where the idea of reading stories came about, not as a way to increase my visibility, but as a way to increase the number of readers in the world. Opera single handedly created a boom in book sales by doing little more than talking about books. I think that modern entertainment can take interest in reading farther. Podcasts and Twitch streams are filled with content that is actually dead air, but people will tune in and listen. They connect with the player, the streamer, the speaker, and they are content to be apart of somebody else's discovery. A big part of what makes Twitch successful is simply watching these personalities react.

Wattpad is literally an endless supply of new stories that are available for free online. For some, anything that isn't traditionally published is a book not worth anyone's time. But there are hundreds of thousands of people submitting entire novels to literary agents every single year. Statistics alone supports the idea that great books are not going to get the representation they deserve. What are those thousands of unpublished authors supposed to do with their novels, wait patiently for exterior validation?

I don't think there's any shame in self publishing a novel and Wattpad and platforms like it are a perfectly reasonable way of putting out that content. Is there under edited content on Wattpad? Of course, but can anyone in good faith say the same isn't true of all published works? Yes, some writers are just starting out, and they dump their content onto Wattpad, but I don't understand why that's immediately a reason to balk. The writers liked the idea enough to bring it to life. Sure, finding a way to manifest those ideas is complex and difficult, but I honestly believe that a first body of work can still have an unironic entertainment in them.

I've been streaming on Wednesdays from 10am-noon pacific time. I might change that moving forward, but right now it's looking like I'm only going to be adding more time. If you're interested in joining me for story time, check me out on Twitch.

https://www.twitch.tv/ashnovelist

[script-a-world]

Hey I have a question about creating countries that are made up of islands, but not have seafood as a staple and vegetarianism is the norm among religious adherents and even among common people vegetarianism isn't unheard of. How can that make sense?

Tex: I don’t know how far back you want to look in order to find an island culture that doesn’t eat seafood or any other type of meat, but for the sake of context I’ll be throwing some darts around the map and see what island cultures typically eat.

I’ll start with Pacific Islanders and list a few of the cultures from the Pacific Ocean:

Polynesian region, composed of peoples such as the Samoans, Māori, Tahitians, Native Hawaiians, and Tongans

Micronesian region, composed of peoples such as the Carolinians, Chamorros, Chuukese, and Nauruans

Melanesian region, composed of peoples such as the Papuans, Moluccans, the Austronesian descendants in Vanuatu, and at a stretch the Torres Strait Islanders of Australia

These groups are roughly divided into two ethnolinguistic groups: the Austronesian peoples who speak Oceanic languages, and the Papuan peoples who speak the Papuan languages. For the most part, both groups are from Southeast Asia (the Papuan first wave was from the Malay Archipelago), and their linguistic origins reflect that.

It should be noted that none of these people ultimately originated from these island regions - they all came from part of a continent that was close to the Pacific Ocean. Ye olde ages ago did their ancestors decide to strike out and immigrate to new areas, and their diet adapted accordingly. Religions that ban the eating of things like shellfish and animals are a comparatively recent phenomenon, because it meant abstaining from an easily-accessible food source.

I’m going to momentarily branch off and list some island cultures of the Atlantic Ocean so my examples are a little more balanced:

Northern: Faroe Islands (Danish, sort of), Iceland, Baffin Island (Canada)

Eastern: Azores (Portugal), Canary Islands (Spain), Madeira (Portugal), São Tomé and Príncipe (Gulf of Guinea)

Western: Barbados of the Lesser Antilles, Prince Edward Island (Canada, a traditional island of the Miꞌkmaq), and Cuba (native lands of the Guanahatabey, Taíno, and Ciboney)

Antarctic region: Tierra del Fuego (Chile, native land to the Yaghan),

Many of these islands were close to nearby continents, and often traded with each other for resources, so there is cultural precedent of eating things other than marine life. A couple examples would be the Taíno, and the Kalinago peoples, both of whom originate from South America. The Yaghan “traveled by canoes between islands to collect food: the men hunted sea lions, while the women dove to collect shellfish”, so still ate some form of meat.

For a couple of Atlantic island examples that did not have indigenous people: the sailors who visited Ascension Island hunted the local birds and turtles for food, and those whole lived on Saint Helena imported livestock, fruit trees, and vegetables for the purpose of colonization.

Many, if not all, of these Atlantic islanders also ate meat of some sort, be it livestock from a continent, birds, fish, or shellfish. Historically speaking, meat of any sort was a cheaply-obtained food in terms of net caloric gain compared to net calories spent obtaining said food.

While the over-consumption of anything is bad, and red meats in particular are often touted as lending an increased risk for cardiovascular diseases - which a 2016 meta-analysis noted frequently occurred with a lifestyle risk factor (Citation 1) -  red meat in moderation is fairly healthy (Citation 2, Citation 3). There is evidence that diet affects the activation of different alleles (phys.org), which is indicative of a population’s change toward agriculture (Citation 4), though in particular an overconsumption of carbohydrates can result in metabolic inflammation and obesity (ScienceDaily).

Humans are omnivorous by default, and require 20 amino acids in order to be healthy. The nine that the human body cannot produce must be consumed from an outside source - MedicalNewsToday does an excellent job of breaking this down and informing readers of viable sources of each of these essential amino acids. Unfortunately for those who might have abstained from meat before the invention of supplements, the healthiest diet for them was made with the addition of dairy products (Citation 5, eggs (The Incredible Egg, Citation 6), and fish (Seafood Health Facts 1, Seafood Health Facts 2, Citation 7)

As I don’t know the level of technology your countries, I cannot make the assumption that non-meat amino acids can be created and distributed to your populace in a relatively inexpensive manner. The nutrient density of meat vs non-meat foods is debatable (Citation 8), so I would hesitate to forgo meat entirely in a culture without some reason as to why an otherwise viable source of nutrition cannot be used.

Human nutrition is plainly a complex topic with many sub-specialities, and would take any one of us a very long time to adequately explain even a portion of it, especially in conjunction with anthropological factors such as geographic origin and developed cultural norms. I’ve added some more things to peruse in the Further Reading section below, but please be aware that all of this only starts to scratch the surface of what you’ve asked. If you would like to return with more precise questions, we’d be more than happy to try answering them.

Citations

PDF - Song M, Fung TT, Hu FB, et al. Association of Animal and Plant Protein Intake With All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(10):1453–1463. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.4182

PDF - McAfee, Alison J., et al. "Red meat consumption: An overview of the risks and benefits." Meat science 84.1 (2010): 1-13.

PDF - Wyness, Laura. "The role of red meat in the diet: nutrition and health benefits." Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 75.3 (2016): 227-232.

PDF - Ye, Kaixiong, et al. "Dietary adaptation of FADS genes in Europe varied across time and geography." Nature ecology & evolution 1.7 (2017): 0167.

PDF - Rafiq, Saima et al. “Chemical Composition, Nitrogen Fractions and Amino Acids Profile of Milk from Different Animal Species.” Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences vol. 29,7 (2015): 1022-8. doi:10.5713/ajas.15.0452

PDF - Hoffman, Jay R., and Michael J. Falvo. "Protein–which is best?." Journal of sports science & medicine 3.3 (2004): 118.

PDF - Ralston, Nicholas VC. "Selenium health benefit values as seafood safety criteria." EcoHealth 5.4 (2008): 442-455.

PDF - Bohrer, Benjamin M. "Nutrient density and nutritional value of meat products and non-meat foods high in protein." Trends in food science & technology 65 (2017): 103-112.

Further Reading:

Greater Antilles - Wikipedia

Gulf and sea island of the Atlantic Ocean - Wikipedia

List of Caribbean islands - Wikipedia

Amino acid synthesis - Wikipedia

“Microbial production of amino acids and derived chemicals: synthetic biology approaches to strain development.” - PubMed

Lobster history as prison food - Wikipedia

Religious restrictions on the consumption of pork - Wikipedia

Taeniasis/cysticercosis - World Health Organization

“How Dietary Supplements Work” - How Stuff Works

“Risks and side effects of dietary supplements” - American Cancer Society

PDF - ADVERSE EFFECTS OF NUTRACEUTICALS AND DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS by MJJ Ronis et al.

Dietary Supplements - National Institutes of Health (NIH)

“Evolution of tryptophan and its foremost metabolites’ concentrations in milk and fermented dairy products” by Antonella Bertazzo et al.

PDF - Associations of Maternal Vitamin B12 Concentration in Pregnancy With the Risks of Preterm Birth and Low Birth Weight: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data by Tormod Rogne et al.

Saphira: A less historical approach would be to analyze why the Vegetarianism is highlighted by Religious pursuit. I would even gamble that the culture was originally focused on seafood, until something changed. Did a new predator enter the seas, making it hard to feed the people? Did they overfish? Who knows.

But something saved them from starvation when the waters rose empty. Things grew on land. Either it was a gift from the Divines that they worship, or a Prophet, or perhaps there’s even a stranger lore more Maoi styled: And so the [Divine] in all their wisdom told [ancient hero] to take the last fish of the sea, and plant it on the highest hill. [Ancient hero] fed their family from the catch, but did not eat the last fish. Hungry and tired, they climbed to the highest peak and planted the fish in the Earth- and the [Divine] blessed his faith and good will. From the fish sprouted the first [main plant food], in such abundance, that [Ancient Hero] ate their fill, and brought down the plenty for the first farmers.Contrived? Yes. Tried and true? You betcha. Consider how the habits and the rituals they serve today serve as tethers, or tangible connections to their heritage, history and culture.

Constablewrites: Writing With Color covered the role of cows in Hinduism here, which might be helpful for framing your thinking. But when religion is negatively impacting the survival of the community, it’s generally more likely that religion sprouts a loophole than that the whole tribe piously starves to death. (See also the Catholic church designating beaver as a fish for purposes of Lent.)

[powerfultears-blog]

What say you???

A couple of day's ago I listened to a conversation where this one young man was being questioned on what's so special about Jesus? It was a debate type discussion and I just watched as that young brother got tricked into a useless fight. That's how things go, people speak without having solid facts about what they are saying, and before you know it there is no understanding or objectivity involved in the discussion at all. I listened as this discussion all started about did Jesus really rise from the dead??? Afterwards, I did take the opportunity to share certain things with him. Easter(Resurrection) Sunday is a day we celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. But what do we mean when we say Jesus rose from the grave? More to the point, what difference does it make if he did? If we can't answer those questions, Easter doesn't mean much !!!

That's why it's very important to not get intellectually distracted about Easter, but understand as a Christian everything is about Resurrection Sunday. Chocolate bunnies and colored eggs have no power to stir passions in our souls. But what if? What if there really was a man who died and lived again. What if the cold flesh of this man's corpse really did grow warm? What if his empty lungs filled with air and his stilled heart actually began to bear again? What if the lifeless limbs of this man - dead and locked in his tomb- became strong two thousand years ago, the man Jesus really did die - and then, three days later- walk out of his tomb alive? would that matter to you? Should it matter to you? The Bible answer is clear !!! for believers and unbelievers alike the resurrection of Jesus matters more than we can know !!!

That's what the Apostle Peter tell us in the first Christian sermon ever preached. In Act 2:22-41, Peter specifically focuses on the bodily resurrection of Jesus and what it means for believers and unbelievers alike. With his words, Peter reminds us how the reality that Jesus conquers death impacts the life of every person who ever lived or will yet live !!! Preaching to the same people who had, only weeks before, demanded that Jesus be crucified, Peter declares "22. Men of Israel, Listen to those words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with Miracles and wonders and sings which God performed through him in your midst, just as you yourselves know 23. this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put him to death. 24"But God raised him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for him to be held in its power. 25" for David says of him, I saw The LORD ALWAYS IN MY PRESENCE' FOR HE IS AT MY RIGHT HAND, SO THAT I WILL NOT BE SHAKEN. 26'THEREFORE MY HEAR WAS GLAD AND MY TONGUE EXULTED; MOREOVER MY FLESH ALSO WILL LIVE IN HOPE; 27 BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT ABANDON MY SOUL TO HADES, NOR ALLOW YOUR HOLY ONE TO UNDERGO DECAY. 28 ' YOU HAVE MADE KNOWN TO ME THE WAYS OF LIFE' YOU WILL MAKE ME FULL OF GLADNESS WITH YOUR PRESENCE.' 29 Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the Patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us this day.30 And so, because he was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAR one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE, 31 he looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that HE WAS NEITHER ABANDONED TO HADES, NOR DID His flesh SUFFER DECAY. 32" This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses. 33."Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear. 34 "For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says: 'THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, SIT AT MY RIGHT HAD, 35 UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET." 36 "Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made him both the Lord and Christ--this Jesus whom you crucified." 37 Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what shall we do? 38 Peter said to them, "Repent and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39" For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to himself." 40 And with many other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying Be saved from this perverse generations!" 41 So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls."

Before we can understand the meaning of Christ's resurrection, we have to know who Jesus is. And who Jesus is, is exactly where Peter begins this part of his sermon. In verse 22, Peter reminds his hearers that Jesus of Nazareth was a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and sings that God did through him...

Just about everyone knows that Jesus was a miracle worker. Fewer know God's purpose behind his miracles. According to Peter, God used the mighty works, the wonders, and the signs Jesus did on earth to testify that Jesus was exactly who He claimed to be !!! And who did Jesus claim to be? The first four books of the New Testament tell us. These books are called the gospels. And one thin the gospels make clear is that Jesus was a man. Jesus was fully human. But at the same time, in the gospels, Jesus also claims to be God !!! In John 10:30, Jesus declares, I and the father (that is, "God the father and I") are one. Likewise, in John 14:9 Jesus says, "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father".

And in John 8:58, Jesus takes God's personal name for Himself when he declares, "Before Abraham was, I am. "I am" that's the personal Name of God revealed to Moses in the book of Exodus.

And so we see that Jesus wasn't just any man. Jesus was God become man !!! And as God, the gospel tells us that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of a virgin, lived without sin, taught and preached with all authority, and even forgave the sins of others. As God become man, everything Jesus did was right. As God become man, everything Jesus said was true !!!

Which raises the question- If Jesus was God, what's Acts 2:23 about? That's where Peter goes on to say, this Jesus - that is this Jesus that God attested to with miracles, wonders, and sings- this Jesus was delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God and you crucified and killed him.

Stop and think about that !!! The bible is telling us that "God become man", was crucified and killed!!! How could that happen? More important, why did that happen? In verse 23, Peter reminds us that the death of Jesus on the cross was no accident. Even though Christ was Murdered by sinful men, His death wasn't random. It didn't catch God by surprise. Or the contrary Peter says Jesus died, "according to the definite plan and knowledge of God". And until we know why Jesus died, We'll never understand what his resurrection means!!!

So why did God the Father, plan for sinful humanity to murder Jesus on a cross? The Bible tells us. The Bible says Jesus died according to the plan and foreknowledge of God in order to pay our sin penalty in full !!! Jesus died to suffers God's wrath against our sin. Jesus suffered God's judgment in our place. Jesus died so we can be forgiven- So we can have heaven when we deserve nothing but hell !!!

I'm wondering right now? Do you believe that's true? Do you believe that you're a sinner who deserves nothing but hell? The Bible say's it's true. The Bible says every one of us are sinful and fallen. Not one of us is righteous in the eyes of our Holy God. Even though we like to flatter ourselves, Roman 3:10-12 tells us the truth about ourselves. It declares, "None is righteous No, Not one understands: No one seeks God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; No one does good, not even one". Easy for me to understand because of my constant failure and sins, but do how do you see it, What say you???

Do you believe - or do you deny- What the Bible says? Do you deny your lust? Do you deny your selfishness? Do you deny your pride?, your back-bitting your gossip, your immorality, your unfaithfulness, your vanity, your arrogance, your resistance of what is right? Do you deny your sin? Can't we just be honest with ourselves? I know the word "Sinner" isn't politically correct - but it's the only word that will do. you're a sinner and so am I. We don't please God. We can't please God. As sinners, we have no power to save ourselves from the condemnation we deserve!!! And that's why Jesus died according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God. Because God so love the world, Jesus died to pay our sin penalty so we can be forgiven - so we can enjoy friendship with God- so we can have heaven instead of hell!!!

Isaiah 53: 5-6 declares it, "But He (Jesus was wounded for our transgressions; He was crushed for our iniquities; upon Him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned everyone to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him (On Jesus) the iniquity (the sin) of us all." He laid our sin on Jesus and punished Him in our place !!!

And so now we know who Jesus is. Jesus is God become human. More than that, we know why Jesus died. Jesus died to pay the penalty for our sin so we can be forgiven and receive God's gift for eternal life.

What say you???

J.P.